The Rostock Regional Court sentenced Gina H. on 10 November 2026 for the murder of eight-year-old Fabian to life imprisonment. The court also found that the offence was of particularly serious gravity. It based its conviction on 44 pieces of circumstantial evidence. The defence announced that it would appeal the ruling, which is not yet final, by lodging an appeal on points of law .
In the court’s view, the defendant killed the boy from Güstrow on 10 October 2025 at a pond near Klein Upahl in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania. Gina H. had previously been in a relationship with Fabian’s father. She denied killing the child during the trial; her lawyers had sought an acquittal.
After several months of hearings, the court said it had no reasonable doubt that she was responsible. There was no confession or direct eyewitness. The court’s decision turned on the overall picture formed by traces of evidence, testimony, communications data and contradictions in the defendant’s statements.
The pieces of circumstantial evidence cited included shoe and fibre traces, as well as a mobile phone that was switched off at the time of the crime. The court also considered an attempt to agree on a false alibi and knowledge of the case that it regarded as evidence known only to the perpetrator. It was convinced that Gina H. had been both near Fabian’s home and in the area where his body was later found.
The court reconstructed events differently from the Public Prosecutor’s Office in its closing argument. It found that Gina H. initially wanted to persuade the boy to cut off contact with his father. Only when she failed to do so, the court said, did she decide to commit the crime while in the woods. After the verdict, the defence said it had been surprised by this account.
The court found that the elements of murder—treachery and base motives—had been established. Because Fabian trusted the defendant, he had not expected an attack. The court considered the motive to be a possessive desire to control his father. In finding the offence to be of particularly serious gravity, it took into account, among other things, the combination of the elements of murder and the victim’s age.
This finding makes any later release on parole more difficult. However, it does not automatically mean that the convicted person must remain in prison for the rest of her life. Any suspension of the sentence would have to be considered separately, subject to the statutory requirements.
The announced appeal on points of law means the proceedings are not over. In such an appeal, the Federal Court of Justice would review the verdict for errors of law; a full rehearing of the evidence, as at the trial, is not envisaged. If the verdict were quashed, the case could be heard again before a different criminal court chamber.
Editor: Mira Cadena (Article created with AI assistance).